What John Q. Public thinks of hunters.....

[welsh]

'Hunting for Food' in context of surveys means sustenance hunting by the Indigenous. The rest of us are considered "Sport' hunters by the general public....

Unsubstantiated and, as it happens, incorrect.

Everyone of those you mentioned have special 'Ethics' committees that review reported behavior of their members....

Also incorrect. True of lawyers, doctors, etc. but not true in many other areas where ethics are understood to apply. The existence of ethics does not rely on an enforcement mechanism: that is like arguing that morality cannot exist without hell.



Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Snowwalker]

How about you start, by making the case that this is actually hunting, rather than pest control or veterinary euthanasia?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

I will fill in the story after he answers.

[MikePal]

Unsubstantiated and, as it happens, incorrect.

Well since you quoted a survey that provides 80% acceptance of Hunters by the general public how about you provide the link so we can read it for ourselves....

Also incorrect. True of lawyers, doctors, etc. but not true in many other areas where ethics are understood to apply. The existence of ethics does not rely on an enforcement mechanism: that is like arguing that morality cannot exist without hell.

Balderdash !! (Almost) every profession that has a licensing body has strictly defined ramifications for failure to uphold the perceived ethics of the profession. You can lose you license/job over an activity ruled unethical by committee...

Morality still exists with no fear of 'hell' with in everyone in the world that doesn't believe in Heaven.....silly analogy.

[welsh]

I will fill in the story after he answers.

Oh.

So you're withholding pertinent details?

Again, your challenge is pointless, because you have not made the case that this scenario is even hunting. If I euthanize an injured animal, that's not hunting. If I dispatch a pest animal, that's not hunting. And your scenario would seem to fit these categories more accurately.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[welsh]

(Almost) every profession that has a licensing body has strictly defined ramifications for failure to uphold the perceived ethics of the profession.

The question concerns whether ethics exist in the absence of licensing bodies.



Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[trimmer21]

The question concerns whether ethics exist in the absence of licensing bodies.



Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

In the absence of licensing bodies,"ethics" seems to have evolved along with society in general. Where society has evolved from is easy. Where society will evolve in future is like pushing a chain. Crystal ball,anyone?

[MarkB]

I am a professional engineer. The last time I read the PEO's code of ethics was when I wrote the exam over two decades ago. Application of ethics can be driven by desire to do good or the right thing. However, there may be times when your choice of what "right" thing to do is not obvious. This is where there should be some mechanism for people to fall back on to assist them in determining what the right choice is. I've just never personally had a situation where the decision was that tough.

Here's an example ... you research something and discover a cure to some disease. Government doesn't approve. Your cure could save 100's if not thousands of children from dying ... but you have not received approval to administrate. Does your duty to the public trump your duty to Government? Code will say follow the laws. But does that really mean it's the right thing to do? That is why I indicate there should be a mechanism to help you understand what the right thing to do is ... the mechanism may rely on the code, but I think the mechanism should also include debate with colleagues to reach consensus on the right approach.

Now, if we want to get philosophical or even theological ... human nature isn't that great ... especially nowadays. The law and the code of ethics is pretty much the minimum you should apply in your life to avoid jail. That isn't a really noble objective is it ... avoid jail? Unfortunately being truly a good person in today's times means operating with principles that are FAR above the law and code of ethics. But none-the-less, it's unfortunate but true, we need to spell out what is right and wrong ... and here's even worse news. As our moral compass becomes more broken, the laws themselves are changed for the worse, so the standard becomes less and less ethical.

Anyhow, just some thoughts.

[Snowwalker]

Oh.

So you're withholding pertinent details?
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

I have provided the details needed by Badenoch. Everything he has based his augments on is there. The animal can't or does not run away, the hunter walked up and shot it in the head. Now all he has to do is answer the questions.

[MikePal]

In the absence of licensing bodies,"ethics" seems to have evolved along with society in general. Where society has evolved from is easy. Where society will evolve in future is like pushing a chain. Crystal ball,anyone?

It seems for many of the younger folk, ethics is rooted in how their actions will be perceived on Social Media....and how immediate and brutal violators are dealt with.

Maybe the new yard stick ...the evolution from the old Public Shaming of being put in stocks in front of the town hall

[welsh]

I have provided the details needed by Badenoch. Everything he has based his augments on is there. The animal can't or does not run away, the hunter walked up and shot it in the head. Now all he has to do is answer the questions.

So again, you're tacitly admitting here that you're holding something back.

In any case, you still haven't answered the question: is this scenario hunting?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk